Illustrative only

Peak-sales model

Asset A

Peak-sales model for Asset A: addressable patients times peak penetration times annual net price, with persistence applied. At the base case 430,000 patients, 18%, $4,600 and 0.82 give $292m.

Addressable patients

430,000

48% of 900,000 treated · HFrEF · NYHA II–III

Epidemiology

Peak penetration

18%

0 of 7 dimensions at target · from the profile set in Strategic fit

Strategic fit

Annual net price

$4,600

the price that profile supports on the corridor

Ideal TPP

Peak sales

$292m

77,400 patients at peak

0.82 persistence applied · share of a year on therapy, from the 12-month discontinuation of the marketed classes

Risk-adjusted$146mat 50% PoS

Next value inflectionH2 2027 readout – a target-level mortality result takes peak sales from $292m to $496m.

Strategic fit versus the ideal TPP

Where Asset A is expected to land

Asset A against the minimum and target the ideal TPP sets for each dimension; the level chosen on each sets the penetration and the price in the peak-sales model.

Minimum to be relevantTarget to winStandard of care todayWhere Asset A is expected to landBest Phase III competitor – Asset B, expected

  • Standard of care today 0%Minimum to be relevant 8%Target to win 15%Asset B 8%

    FitMinimum

  • Standard of care today 0%Minimum to be relevant 12%Target to win 25%Asset B 14%

    FitMinimum

  • Standard of care today 3 ptsMinimum to be relevant 5 ptsTarget to win 10 ptsAsset B 4 pts

    FitMinimum

  • Standard of care today 62%Minimum to be relevant 65%Target to win 80%Asset B 70%

    FitMinimum

  • Standard of care today 88%Minimum to be relevant 88%Target to win 94%Asset B 86%

    FitMinimum

  • Standard of care today 59%Minimum to be relevant 59%Target to win 90%Asset B 59%

    FitMinimum

  • Standard of care today 43%Minimum to be relevant 43%Target to win 75%Asset B 25%

    FitMinimum

Strategic fit

Asset A reaches the target on 0 of 7 dimensions and clears the minimum on 7. What the H2 2027 readout shows decides the profile it launches with.

Probability of success

Base rate by stage

Historical probability of reaching approval from each development stage in this therapy area; Phase III, the current stage, is marked.

  • Phase I8%
  • Phase II15%
  • Phase IIICurrent stage55%
  • Filed88%

Asset-specific drivers

As assessed

  • Target validation±3 ppMechanism validated in an earlier Phase III programme
  • Biomarker clarity±3 ppNo enrichment biomarker; enrolment by EF segment and NYHA class
  • Clinical effect size±6 ppPhase II moved the natriuretic peptide more than the functional endpoint
  • Modality novelty±2 ppOral small molecule on a precedented development path
  • Safety signal±5 ppNo new signal reported at Phase II
  • Regulatory precedent±2 ppEvent-driven endpoint accepted in the indication
  • Competitive context±6 pp14 Phase III programmes; a comparator could move before readout

Adjusted probability of success

Low35%

Base50%

High60%

Base rate plus the drivers; low and high at 0.7× and 1.2× of it.

Clinical and development profile

Asset A

Target / mechanism
Cardiac myosin modulation
Modality
Oral small molecule
Stage
Phase III, enrolling
Population
HFrEF, NYHA II–III, on foundational therapy
Primary endpoint
CV death or HF hospitalisation, event-driven
Sponsor
Company A
Differentiation
Adds a contractility mechanism absent from the four foundational classes
Phase II
Natriuretic peptide and symptom score moved; no new safety signal
Competitive position at launch
2029: two marketed add-on classes; Asset J launching the same year, Asset B in 2030

Timeline to launch

Asset A timeline: Phase III enrolling in 2026, primary readout in the second half of 2027, submission in 2028 and a potential launch in 2029.

  • 2026Phase III enrolling
  • H2 2027Primary readout
  • 2028Submission
  • 2029Potential launch